The science- this is the form and result of people's activity to reveal the objective laws of the existence of nature, society and man.

Features of the objects of science require the use of a special language with a strictly verified meaning of individual words, as well as special tools and methods of research activity. One of essential methods sciences, which largely determine its appearance, is idealization. Scientific knowledge constantly resorts to the creation of ideal objects, models that represent real objects (too changeable and involved in many connections) only in certain aspects. Hence the tendency inherent in science to reductionism, i.e., the simplification of reality in the process of its rational comprehension.

Science is also characterized by a special it with, otherwise the set of norms of behavior and communication accepted in the scientific community.

In modern society - and not only among scientists - the position of scenism, according to which science acts as the main and almost the only tool of human orientation in the world, the most important source of human well-being.

40. Structure and dynamics of scientific knowledge

Scientific knowledge is carried out on two interconnected, but still possessing their own specifics levels- empirical and theoretical.

empirical knowledge(Greek empeiria - experience) is directed directly at its object, it practically interacts with it, reflects its external aspects and connections accessible to sensual contemplation. The main methods that are used in this case are observation and experiment.

Theoretical knowledge reflects phenomena and processes from the point of view of their internal, essential connections, comprehended with the help of rational processing of empirical knowledge. At the same time, such methods of cognition are widely used as: idealization, abstraction (distraction from a number of properties and relations of objects), (deduction (transition from general knowledge to particular), axiomatic method (building a theory based on a number of axioms or postulates), etc. .

The theory itself is, of course, the highest form of not only theoretical, but also scientific knowledge in general (it was not for nothing that M. Heidegger defined science as a theory of the real). Theory is an internally consistent system of fundamental ideas and laws that gives a holistic view of the essential connections in the considered set of objects. Two important requirements for any scientific theory to distinguish it from pseudo-scientific speculation, - verifiability And falsifiability. According to the principle of verification, a concept or proposition has meaning only if it is empirically verifiable. The principle of falsification insists that any scientific theory should allow risky predictions, the failure of which in practice would disprove it.

important role in the formation of the theory plays the correct statement of the problem. Problem- such a form of theoretical knowledge, the content of which is that which is not yet known by man, but which needs to be known.

Thinking about problems, scientists put forward hypotheses. Hypothesis is a scientific proposition that solves a problem in a probabilistic way.

Science is not only a creative activity to obtain new knowledge and the result of this activity: the totality of knowledge given in complete system based on certain principles.

The classical image of science is associated with natural science. For a long time this image of science was considered the only possible and absolute one. However, in the second half of the 19th century, humanitarian and social knowledge began to develop rapidly, which in its content (subject, method, forms of existence) conflicted with the classical image of science. On turn of XIX-XX centuries in philosophy, the problem of substantiating a new type of knowledge appears, which is united by the name “sciences about the spirit”.

Science as a special kind of knowledge has a number of characteristics.

The main feature of scientific knowledge is rationality, logical consistency. In science, new information is formulated and expressed in the form of consistent principles and laws.

Another feature of scientific knowledge is objectivity. Science seeks to comprehend reality as fully and accurately as possible, excluding subjectivistic moments as much as possible.

Scientific knowledge is not limited to stating facts; scientific knowledge has an explanatory character. Scientific knowledge, unlike everyday, artistic, religious or mythological knowledge, is evidence-based knowledge. Science seeks to substantiate its provisions. This, however, does not negate the fact that in scientific knowledge there are hypotheses, unproven theorems, paradoxes, etc.

Beyond the individual and the accidental, science seeks to discover the general and the necessary. The purpose of science is the discovery of patterns and general principles.

The special task of science is the prediction of unknown phenomena and facts or the determination of development trends already known. The predictive power or heuristic of scientific theories is one of the most important criteria by which new knowledge in science is evaluated.

A feature of scientific knowledge is also its systematic organization. All the data of science are ordered in theories and concepts, which in turn are consistent with each other.

Reflecting the world in its materiality, science forms a single, interconnected, developing system of knowledge about its laws. At the same time, it is divided into many branches of knowledge (private sciences), which differ from each other in what side of reality, the form of the movement of matter, they study.

According to the subject and method of knowledge, we can distinguish:

natural sciences - natural science;

society - social science (humanities, social sciences);

cognition and thinking - logic, epistemology, dialectics;

Technical science;

mathematics.

Each group of sciences can be subjected to a more fractional division.

By "remoteness" from the practice of science can be divided into two large types:

fundamental, where there is no direct orientation to practice,

applied, where there is a direct orientation to the application of the results of scientific knowledge to solve industrial and socio-practical problems.

At the same time, the boundaries between individual sciences and scientific disciplines are conditional and mobile.

Science is a special kind cognitive activity aimed at developing objective, systematically organized and substantiated knowledge about the world. A social institution that ensures the functioning of scientific cognitive activity.

As a type of knowledge, science interacts with its other types: everyday, artistic, religious-mythological, philosophical. It arises from the needs of practice and regulates it in a special way. Science aims to reveal the essential connections (laws), according to which objects can be transformed into human activity. Since any objects can be transformed in activity, all of them can become subjects of scientific research. Science studies them as objects that function and develop according to their own natural laws. It can also study a person as a subject of activity, but also as a special object.

The substantive and objective way of viewing the world, characteristic of science, distinguishes its excellent ways of knowing. Scientific concepts- rational, highlighting the general and essential in the world of objects.

Reflecting the world in its objectivity, science provides only one of the cuts of the diversity of the human world. It does not exhaust the entire culture, but is only one of the areas that interacts with other areas - religion, morality, philosophy, etc. The sign of the objectivity and objectivity of knowledge is the most important characteristic of science, but it is still insufficient to determine its specificity, since separate object and subject knowledge can also give ordinary knowledge. But unlike him, science is not limited to the study of only those objects, their properties and relations, which in principle can be mastered in the practice of the corresponding historical epoch.

The constant desire of science to expand the field of objects under study is the system-forming feature that justifies other characteristics of science that distinguish it from ordinary knowledge. First of all - the difference in their results. Ordinary knowledge creates a conglomerate of knowledge, information, only separate fragments of which are interconnected. The truth of knowledge is verified here directly in actual practice. But since science goes beyond these limits, it can only partially rely on the existing forms of mass practical development of objects. She needs a special practice, with the help of which the truth of her knowledge is checked - a scientific experiment. Part of the knowledge is tested in the experiment, the rest are connected by logical connections, which ensures the transfer of truth from one statement to another. As a result, the characteristics of its knowledge inherent in science arise - their systemic organization, validity and proof.

Science involves the use of special means and methods of activity, a special language and special instrumentation systems.

There are also specific features of the subject scientific activity, the formation of which requires special training of the cognizing subject, which ensures his ability to apply the means and methods inherent in science in solving its problems and problems. Systematic studies of science presuppose the assimilation by the subject of a special system of values ​​peculiar to it, the foundation of which are value orientations for the search for truth. The attitudes correspond to the two defining features of science: objectivity and objectivity and its intention to study ever new objects, regardless of the available opportunities for their mass practical development.

Three stages of the formation of science. 1. The transition from pre-science to science was the first to be carried out by mathematics. 2. Following mathematics, the method of theoretical knowledge, based on the movement of thought in the field of theoretical ideal objects, was established in natural science. Here it is known as the method of generating hypotheses with their subsequent substantiated experience. 3. The formation of technical sciences as a kind of mediating layer of knowledge between natural science and production, and then the formation of social and human sciences.

In the development of science (starting from the 17th century), three main types of scientific rationality can be distinguished: classical (17th - early 20th century), non-classical (1st half of the 20th century), post-nonclassical (end of the 20th century). Classical science assumed that the subject is distant from the object, as if from the outside, cognizes the world, and considered the elimination from the explanation and description of everything that relates to the subject and the means of activity as a condition for objectively true knowledge. Non-classical rationality is characterized by the idea of ​​the relativity of the object and the means and operations of activity; the explication of these means and operations is a condition for obtaining true knowledge about the object. An example of the implementation of this approach was quantum-relativistic physics. Post-nonclassical rationality takes into account the correlation of knowledge about an object not only with means, but also with value-target structures of activity, assuming the explication of intra-scientific values ​​and their correlation with social goals and values.

Science as a social institution or a form of social consciousness associated with the production of scientific and theoretical knowledge, is a certain system of relationships between scientific organizations, members of the scientific community, a system of norms and values. Its establishment as an institution is the result of recent development.

The concept of institutum - from lat. establishment, device, custom. The Institute presupposes a complex of norms, principles, rules, models of behavior that regulate human activity, woven into the functioning. An institution is a phenomenon of a supra-individual level, its norms and values ​​prevail over individuals acting within its framework. The very concept of "social institution" began to come into use thanks to the research of Western sociologists. R. Merton is considered to be the founder of the institutional approach to science.

The concept of "social institution" reflects the degree of fixation of a particular type of human activity. Institutionality involves the formalization of all types of relations and the transition from unorganized activities and informal relations of the type of agreements and negotiations to the creation of organized structures that involve hierarchy, power regulation and regulations.

In antiquity, scientific knowledge was dissolved in the systems of natural philosophers, in the Middle Ages - in the practice of alchemists, mixed with either religious or philosophical views. An important prerequisite for the formation of science as a social institution is the presence of a systematic education of the younger generation

The emergence of science as a social institution is associated with fundamental changes in the social system and, in particular, with the era of bourgeois revolutions, which gave a powerful impetus to the development of industry, trade, construction, mining, and navigation. The way scientists organize and interact has changed throughout historical development Sciences. Science as a social institution arose in Western Europe in the XVI-XVII centuries. in connection with the need to serve the emerging capitalist production and claimed a certain autonomy. The very existence of science as a social institution indicated that in the system of social division of labor it must perform specific functions, namely, be responsible for the production of theoretical knowledge. Science as a social institution included not only a system of knowledge and scientific activity, but also a system of relations in science, scientific institutions and organizations.

Official science is always forced to support the fundamental ideological attitudes of society, to provide intellectual arguments and practical tools that help maintain the privileged position of state priorities. In this regard, science is ordered to be "inspired" by ideology, to include it in itself. As T. Kuhn aptly noted, "scientists learn to solve puzzles and behind all this lies a great ideology." It should be noted that the degree of ideological pressure is unevenly distributed among the three major classes of science. Social sciences (humanities) are the most dependent on ideological influence, and natural sciences are the least dependent. Technical sciences are largely limited by applied goals, demand from the production side, and the degree of implementation.

Since the assimilation of social norms and standards begins in the process of primary socialization, science can never free itself from the influence of society, although it always strives to be anti-ideological. The characteristics of ideology include its deliberate distortion of reality, dogmatism, intolerance, non-falsifiability. Science professes opposite principles: it strives for an accurate and adequate reflection of reality, is often tolerant of competing theories, never rests on its laurels, and is subject to falsification.

Modern science depends on many factors that determine its development, including not only the demands of production, the needs of the economy and government priorities, but also intellectual, philosophical, religious and even aesthetic factors. The activities of inventors and innovators obsessed with their profession should not be overlooked. Mechanisms play an important role social support scientific research.

Science acts as a factor in the social regulation of social processes. It affects the needs of society, becomes a necessary condition for rational management. The manifestation of the socio-cultural regulation of science is carried out through the system of education, training and involvement of society members in research activities and the ethos of science that has developed in a given society.

Among the social functions of science, there are: cultural and ideological; the function of direct productive force; function of social power.

The latter assumes that the methods of science and its data are used to develop large-scale plans for social and economic development. Science manifests itself as a function of social force in deciding global problems modernity (exhaustion natural resources, air pollution, determination of the scale of environmental hazard).

Science as a social institution includes:

1) scientists with their knowledge, qualifications and experience;

2) division and cooperation of scientific work: a well-established and effectively operating system of scientific information;

3) scientific organizations and institutions, scientific schools and communities; experimental and laboratory equipment, etc.

Science as a social institution has its own branched structure and uses both cognitive and organizational and moral resources. As such, it includes the following components:

- the totality of knowledge and its carriers;

- the presence of specific cognitive goals and objectives;

– performance of certain functions;

- the presence of specific means of cognition and institutions;

– development of forms of control, examination and evaluation scientific achievements;

- the existence of certain sanctions.

The development of institutional forms of scientific activity involved the clarification of the prerequisites for the process of institutionalization, the disclosure of its content and results.

The history of science itself is closely connected with the history of university education, which has the immediate task of not only transferring a system of knowledge, but also preparing people capable of intellectual work and professional scientific activity. The emergence of universities dates back to the 12th century, but the first universities were dominated by a religious paradigm of worldview.

Within science, there are scientific schools that function as an organized and controlled scientific structure, united research program, with a single style of thinking and headed, as a rule, by the personality of an outstanding scientist. Science of science distinguishes between "classical" scientific schools and modern ones. "Classical" scientific schools arose on the basis of universities. The heyday of their activity fell on the second third of the 19th century. At the beginning of the XX century. in connection with the transformation of research laboratories and institutes into the leading form of organization of scientific work, they were replaced by modern (“disciplinary”) scientific schools.

In contrast to the "classical" scientific school, the disciplinary ones weakened the functions of teaching and were focused on planned programs that were formed outside the framework of the school itself.

The next stage in the development of institutional forms of science was the functioning of research teams on an interdisciplinary basis, which ensures the emergence of new discoveries at the junctions various areas knowledge. Interdisciplinarity affirms a mindset for the synthesis of knowledge, as opposed to a disciplinary mindset for analyticity. It also contains a mechanism for "discovering" disciplines for each other, their complementarity and enrichment of the entire complex of human knowledge.

scientism- an ideological position based on the idea of ​​scientific knowledge as the highest cultural value and the determining factor in the orientation of a person in the world. Exact mathematic natural science is considered as the ideal of science, under the influence of which in the knowledge of the laws of nature and related scientific and technological progress and scientism arises. Scientism absolutizes the role of science in life, in an uncritical attitude to the scientific concepts that have become widespread. Thus, in the approach to the role of science in the life of society as a whole, scientism manifests itself in the absolutization of this role, in an uncritical attitude to scientific concepts that have become widespread, in underestimating the need for their constant correction, comparison with other possible views and positions, taking into account a wide range of social, cultural, ethical factors. Scientism in philosophy manifests itself in ignoring its ideological character, in misunderstanding of its specifics in comparison with special scientific knowledge (Positivism, Neopositivism). In social and humanitarian cognition, scientism is associated with underestimating or ignoring the specifics of their subject in comparison with natural scientific objects, with attempts to uncritically and often very artificially introduce the methods of exact natural science into the study of man and society. A very dangerous (primarily for the most real scientific knowledge) consequence of the scientistic cult of science is its ideologization and dogmatization, turning it into a kind of surrogate for religion, supposedly giving the final answer to all the fundamental problems of being, while the true strength of science lies in the openness, incompleteness of the developed its historically transient models of reality. Avoiding the extremes of scientism, critically and unbiasedly analyzing real opportunities science in the context of culture as a whole, at the same time it is dangerous to fall into no less one-sided "science fighting". Science is the most important stimulator of the dynamic development of all aspects of the life of human society, and the spirit of scientific rationality inherent in it is an essential cultural value, developed and affirmed in the complex and dramatic process of reproduction and development of culture.

anti-scientism- an ideological position consisting in a critical (even hostile) assessment of science and its role in the system of culture and scientific knowledge as a factor in man's attitude to the world. The various forms of anti-scientism vary greatly in their degree of criticality towards science. Moderate anti-scientism primarily opposes not so much science itself, but rather aggressive scientism, which seeks to absolutize the role of science and belittle the cultural significance of other forms of human activity and orientation in the world - art, morality, religion, philosophy, everyday consciousness, emotional and personal attitude to the world. etc. This kind of anti-scientism criticizes the scientic absolutization of science primarily from the positions of humanism, defending the need for diversity various forms human experience and man's relationship to the world, which cannot be supplanted by scientific rationality. More radical variants of antiscientism move from criticism of the scientistic absolutization of science to criticism of science as such. In their extreme manifestations, they evaluate the science of existentialist-personalistic positions (for example, N. A. Berdyaev or L. Shestov) as a force that opposes the relationship of man to the world, primarily to his freedom. Religious anti-scientism rejects the possibility of ideological independence of science, insists on the need for religious motivation of scientific knowledge. If the early forms of anti-scientism arose on the basis of forms of consciousness other than science (such as religion, art, morality), then modernity is characterized by the emergence of anti-scientism tendencies on the basis of the critical self-awareness of science itself. Such, for example, is the critique of science as a "myth of modernity" by P. Feyerabend, a representative of postpositivism. Some modern variants of moderate anti-scientism (which, for example, find expression in the so-called ecological consciousness) recognize the powerful impact of science on the process of scientific and technological civilization, but at the same time rightly point out the contradictory nature of this progress, which, along with indisputable achievements, entails and destructive consequences, for which science should also bear responsibility. Anti-scientific criticism of this kind contributed to a more objective and multidimensional assessment of science, its role and possibilities, drawing, in particular, attention to the ethical aspects of science. The "science struggle" of radical anti-scientism (for example, I. Illich) is incompatible with the recognition of the need for scientific knowledge as essential condition problems facing modern humanity.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

ABSTRACT ON PHILOSOPHY

on the topic:

SCIENCE AS A SPECIAL FORM OF KNOWLEDGE OF REALITY

Completed by: l-t Timakov D.S.

Tver 2006

Introduction

This work is devoted to one of the numerous problems of philosophy, namely: science as a form of cognition of reality. Various approaches to understanding this problem will be described here. different years, as well as the properties and functions of science as they were seen by people at various stages of the development of society.

The first part is devoted to the consideration of science as a system that has its own properties and functions. Further, the issues of specificity and generality of knowledge both by individual groups of people and by society as a whole will be considered.

In the third part, a description of scientific truth as a social phenomenon will be given. The fourth part contains the basic universal principles and general scientific methods of cognition and their description.

In the final, fifth, part, the dynamics of the development of worldviews of an opposite nature will be briefly considered: a view of science as an integral part of the culture of a developing society and a view of this problem from the side of opponents of solving cultural issues by scientific methods.

1. Consistency of the phenomenon of science

Science is a specific form of activity (both in theoretical and practical areas) associated with the formation of relatively objective, systematic and proven knowledge about spiritual and material reality.

Science is one of the defining subsystems of culture. TO beginning of XXI V. there are more than 800 definitions of it, because every major scientist (thinker) gives his own interpretation of the phenomenon of science.

If it's clear enough general definition, then several areas of scientific activity should be distinguished, specifying it. Namely:

Identification of not external, but essential characteristics of reality;

Formation of a logically consistent system of knowledge about the objective picture of the world;

Forecasting the state of real objects and processes based on the identified natural and social laws;

Creation and development of special means of cognitive activity (mathematical methods, research equipment, etc.);

Propagation of a special kind professional activity(scientists, engineers, etc.) in the field of social division of labor;

The functioning of a special system of organizations and institutions involved in obtaining, storing, disseminating and implementing the acquired knowledge (libraries, information centers, etc.).

The terms "science" ("science") and "scientist" ("scientist") arose in the first half of the 19th century. in European university practice. They designated activities in the field of mathematics, physics, chemistry and other natural sciences. The term "social science" was later used for activities in the social sciences.

In the process of the genesis and development of scientific knowledge, attention to its classification increased. Let's take a look at some milestones in this process.

The first classifications of science arose in antiquity. Aristotle (384-422 BC) divided philosophy (as a single science) into "theoretical philosophy", "practical philosophy" and "creative philosophy". Moreover, "theoretical philosophy" is subdivided by him into physical, mathematical and theological philosophy; to poetics and rhetoric. Logic is interpreted as propaedeutics (introduction) to the entire system of sciences.

In modern times, F. Bacon (1561-1626) developed a classification of sciences based on contemporary material. Human knowledge has been divided into three areas (spheres), namely: history (memory), poetry (fantasy) and philosophy (reason). At the same time, the selected areas of knowledge were subjected to subsequent detailing.

Representatives of the French Enlightenment (Didero, 1713-1784; and others) in the framework of the "Encyclopedia, or explanatory dictionary sciences, arts and crafts”, singled out mechanics, physics, chemistry, physiology, etc.

A. de Saint-Simon (1760-1825) proposed a classification of sciences by analogy with the class structure of society (slave-owning and feudal society - theology, capitalism - positivism, etc.).

O. Comte (1798-1857) developed the doctrine of "three stages" in the development of science, namely: theological, metaphysical and positive. At the same time, each of the known sciences sequentially passes, in his opinion, the marked stages. Not only the natural sciences (astronomy, physics, biology, etc.) go through the corresponding stages, but also the humanities - sociology.

The fundamental classification of science (philosophy) was proposed by Hegel (1770-1831). Namely: “real philosophy” is subdivided by him into “philosophy of nature” and “philosophy of spirit”. "Philosophy of nature" includes mechanics, physics, organic physics. "Philosophy of spirit" is subdivided into "subjective spirit" (anthropology, phenomenology, psychology), "objective spirit" (law, morality, morality) and "absolute spirit" (art, religion, philosophy).

By the 20th century, the following system of sciences had developed:

Natural science (natural sciences) - a system of scientific knowledge about nature;

Technical knowledge (technical sciences) - a system of scientific knowledge about technical systems; sciences focused on the implementation of natural science knowledge;

Human science (social and human sciences) is a system of scientific knowledge about a person and society and the socio-cultural environment of his habitat.

In this case, we are talking about the "horizontal" dimension of the phenomenon of science. Within the framework of the "vertical" dimension, sciences are distinguished fundamental and applied.

Fundamental sciences are a system of knowledge about the deepest properties of objective reality, associated with the formation of a scientific picture of the world, which, as a rule, does not have a practical orientation. Applied sciences, on the contrary, are considered as a system of knowledge with a pronounced subject-practical orientation.

Fundamental sciences are associated with the identification of the basic laws and principles of the development of nature. Traditional studies of this level are carried out not because of external (social) needs, but because of internal (immanent) incentives. Therefore, at their core, the fundamental sciences do not have a clearly expressed practical orientation. In this sense, axiological (value) neutrality is associated with them. At the same time, discoveries in the fundamental sciences have a fundamental impact on the formation of the natural-science picture of the world, changes in the paradigm (basic characteristics) of scientific thinking. It is in the fundamental sciences that the basic models of cognition are developed, the concepts, principles and laws that make up the foundations of applied sciences are revealed.

Applied sciences, relying on the results of fundamental research, focus on solving specific technical and technological problems related to the interests of society. The sciences of this level are ambivalent; depending on the scope of application, they can be used both for the benefit of a person and have a negative impact on him and his environment. In other words, applied sciences also include value content.

On the one hand, the range of ideas, theories and concepts coming from the field of fundamental sciences to the field of applied research leads to the transformation of applied sciences. This circumstance requires, in turn, the "fundamentalization" of applied sciences. On the other hand, applied sciences actively influence sciences of a fundamental type, increasing the degree of their "practicalization".

First, the means and methods of instrumental knowledge of nature are being improved. And, secondly, when developing applied problems, new ideas and methods often arise. Thus, the development of elementary particle acceleration technology made it possible to substantiate and test theoretical ideas about the fundamental regularities of the microworld. Moreover, the relevant research led to the discovery of new elementary particles, the identification of the laws of their formation, which significantly advanced the understanding of the deep processes of the microworld that determine the evolution of the Universe.

The development of science is an objective process, which is characterized by an orientation towards internal immanent (from Latin immanentis - peculiar, inherent) conditions. The formation of natural science, technical science and human knowledge increasingly reveals its historical dependence on external conditions (social, economic, cultural, etc.).

In other words, the process of interconnection and interaction of sciences is intensifying. Historically, there are several forms of interconnection and interaction between various scientific disciplines. Let us designate some levels of integrativity of science.

Related integration. Relationship scientific disciplines genetically and historically interacting with each other ( physical chemistry, biophysics, economic mathematics, etc.)

Interadjacent integrativity. The relationship of scientific disciplines, both of one cycle (natural sciences) and interconnected ones (for example, bionics is based not only on biology and physics, but also on technical sciences).

Target integration. The interaction of scientific disciplines of various cycles and profiles is carried out to implement the target setting corresponding to a particular science (for example, cybernetics combines not only mathematics or biology, but also systems theory, management methodology, sociology, etc.).

Problem integration. The relationship of various areas of scientific knowledge occurs in the process of solving a specific problem; the degree of integration is a function of its level - from local to global (for example, the solution of a global environmental problem requires the "involvement" of all areas of natural science, technical science and human knowledge).

These trends in science are also correlated with its functions. Several functions of science are noted. Let's highlight some of them, namely: research, teaching, communication, socio-cultural and worldview.

Research function. Science, studying a concrete reality, discovers its new aspects and qualities, reveals more and more effective methods of cognition, etc. The purpose of scientific research is to analyze the patterns of objective reality.

Teaching function. Within its framework, the reproduction of scientific knowledge is carried out - the transfer of scientific ideas from one research system to another. This is carried out in the process of training scientific personnel (through the education system, scientific schools, etc.), which ensures the successive development of science, as well as the formation of new scientific traditions.

communicative function. This is a process of information exchange between members of the scientific community, which includes publications, conferences, discussions, etc. As a result, the relationship of the scientific community is strengthened, the awareness and effectiveness of research activities are increased.

sociocultural function. Science is one of the basic elements of culture that form the basis of civilization. The level and nature of the development of science is an essential factor that fixes the status of society in the dynamics of the historical process. The development of science is a criterion for the positive dynamism of civilization.

worldview function. The cumulative development of science forms the foundations of the scientific worldview, that is, a system of principles, beliefs and ideas that determine a holistic approach to objective reality. In an extremely generalized form, the scientific worldview is associated with the rational attitude of a person (subject) to nature (object).

At various stages of the development of society, certain functions of science dominated. For example, in the ancient period, the emphasis was placed on its worldview functions (a spontaneously dialectical form of worldview); in the medieval period - the teaching function (during this period, science was concentrated mainly in universities); in the conditions of the New Age - the research function of science developed (the formation modern type scientific knowledge).

Until the 19th century the development of science was predominantly immanent in nature, not having a significant impact on the socio-cultural processes of reality. And only by the middle of the 20th century, the functions of science act in unity, forming a systemic integrity that ensures the dynamism of the cognitive process.

2. Enatural science and sociocultural knowledge: specificity and generality

Historically, there have been two points of view on the specifics of natural science (technical science) and human knowledge (social and humanitarian knowledge). The first of them proceeds from the fact that between natural science and human knowledge there is a pronounced specificity, due to the type of natural science and humanitarian knowledge. The second point of view, on the contrary, is based on ideas, according to which there are no fundamental differences between the natural sciences and the humanities.

I. Kant (1724-1804) is at the origin of the views based on the essential difference between the "history of nature" and the "history of society". ".

The neo-Kantian (Baden) school, relying on Kant's teaching, actively developed the thesis about the opposition of natural science and sociocultural knowledge.

G. Rickert (1863-1936) divided the sciences, based on the level of abstraction used within their framework, into generalizing disciplines (natural sciences) and individualizing ( historical sciences). Therefore, in his opinion, in natural science it is possible to reach the level of comprehensive concepts and laws, while historical (sociocultural) disciplines are guided mainly by an individualistic vision of reality. Moreover, the desire to reach a generalizing (generalizing) understanding of historical processes turns into their distortion.

Historically, a number of features of natural science and sociocultural knowledge are distinguished, due to the reality of their specific characteristics. Let's note some of them.

The basis of the knowledge of the laws of nature is the cause-and-effect relationship of natural things and phenomena. Wherein natural patterns independent of human activity. The laws of mechanics, for example, are objective in nature, explaining the specifics of the relationships of bodies in the macrocosm.

On the contrary, the laws of functioning of socio-cultural systems are a function of the activity of society, because they change as a result of socio-cultural development. Therefore, sociocultural patterns are not a constant category.

Of course, the laws of nature, revealed in the framework of natural science, lose their constancy in the process of cognition. The discovery of the microcosm revealed the limitations of the laws of mechanics to the sphere of the macrocosm. At the same time, sociocultural patterns are largely of a normative nature, having a high degree of subjectivity.

So, the natural sciences are characterized by a high degree of objectivity, because their development is connected with the desire to reveal internal natural connections and relationships. Historical disciplines also seek to identify objective trends in the development of social systems. Within their framework, however, the dominance of target and normative ideas is more clearly visible.

The laws of natural science are revealed on the basis of a scientific experiment. Moreover, any theoretical position in a particular science of nature requires experimental confirmation. The situation is different in the social sciences. Within their framework, an experiment (as an active influence on a cognizable object in the natural science sense) is hardly possible.

Natural-science regularities receive the status of a law when, in the process of experiment, it is possible to ensure their repeatability. historical fact is a singular phenomenon. In this sense, any socio-cultural phenomenon is unique in existing historical forms. Hence, cognitive process in natural science and human science it is based on opposite methodological principles.

The specific features of the object of natural science and human knowledge also affect the effectiveness of predicting the development of natural (natural) and socio-natural (integral) systems. The truth of the natural science theory is confirmed not only by experiment, but also by the constructiveness of the forecast, i.e. the possibility of perspective extrapolation of the development of a particular natural system. If in chemical reaction molecular hydrogen and oxygen are involved, then the prognosis is obvious, namely: the process will end with the formation of a molecule. A similar forecasting efficiency is hardly possible in social sciences. In other words, forecasting in social and humanitarian knowledge (unlike natural science and technical science) is characterized by a high degree of uncertainty.

Historically, natural-science knowledge took shape in the form of a scientific theory before the system of sciences about man and society took shape.

At the turn of the XX and XXI centuries. it is becoming increasingly clear that the dividing line between the natural sciences and the humanities is increasingly arbitrary. Let us point out two circumstances that at least confirm this thesis.

Firstly, the magnitude of the problems ("challenges") that require adequate resolution within the framework of modern civilization implies the "connection" of the entire cycle of scientific knowledge. And if in the process of formation and development the status of natural science was extremely high (and human science could not compete with it), then by the middle of the 20th century. the sciences of the social and humanitarian cycle to a certain extent "pressed" the disciplines of the natural sciences (development of economics, psychology, anthropology, social philosophy, etc.). An adequate "response" to the challenges of civilization can be obtained only in the process of interconnection and interaction of various branches of modern scientific knowledge.

And, secondly, the methods of natural science (and technical science) and human science are gradually converging. If before, for example, a scientific experiment was correlated mainly with natural science, then with the development of, say, global modeling, social sciences get the opportunity to “play out” certain situations in the development of society. As a result, the objectivity of social cognition increases, as well as the effectiveness of its predictive constructions. The phenomenon of the "information revolution" is steadily overcoming the traditional dichotomy between natural science and human knowledge. At the same time, differences between them, due to the specifics of the object of study, remain to one degree or another. Man and nature, rushing towards each other, retain, however, their specificity.

3. Scientific truth as a sociocultural phenomenon

The concept of truth is one of the defining ones in the theory of knowledge. Truth is an adequate reflection of reality, its comprehension. In relation to the possibility of cognition of objective reality, there are diametrically opposed points of view.

Proponents of one point of view proceed from the fact that, despite the complexity and inconsistency, reality as a whole is knowable; on the contrary, others - adhering to agnosticism, reject completely (or partially) the possibility of knowing the world. Elements of agnosticism, given the complexity of the cognitive process, are preserved in modern sociocultural conditions.

Different forms of truth are fixed (artistic, moral, political, etc.), corresponding to specific types of knowledge (aesthetics, ethics, politics, etc.). Scientific truth has a special status.

The following criteria of scientific truth are distinguished, which are interconnected. Namely:

Objectivity - independence from external factors;

Consistency - the use of a set of principles, theories, hypotheses, etc.;

Rational evidence - reliance on logical experimental grounds;

The possibility of verifiability is at an experimental practical level.

The search for scientific truth is an evolutionary process. Access to the level of objective scientific truth, i.e., the acquisition of knowledge that does not depend on subjective conditions, is associated with the "stepping" of the cognitive process.

How to separate true knowledge from false? In other words, how to distinguish true knowledge from delusion in its most diverse manifestations?

The search for an answer to this question has been going on since the genesis of scientific knowledge. As a criterion of true knowledge were taken different characteristics, namely: self-evidence, observability, clarity, etc. In the XIX-XX centuries. several principles have been identified, the consideration of which implies reaching the level of true knowledge. Let's highlight some of them.

Principle"practice is the criterion of truth." Practice is understood as a purposeful object-sensory activity of the subject (person) to transform the object (surrounding reality). Scientific practice suggests experimental activities associated with the implementation of the provisions of the theory, thereby confirming its truth or falsity. However, this principle does not mean the absolutization of the practitioner's status in the cognitive process: only in the process of the relationship between practice and science (theory) is the truth of scientific ideas revealed.

Verification principle. In accordance with the views of positivism, the truth of any statement about the objects and processes of reality is ultimately established by comparing it (truth) with sensory data. The difficulty (and often the impossibility) to "touch" directly the objects of scientific research (for example, the microcosm) led neopositivists (logical positivism) to the thesis of partial and experimental indirect confirmation of the theory. Thus, the relationship between theoretical and experimental positions is established as a criterion for the truth of knowledge.

The principle of falsification. In accordance with this principle, only statements that can be falsifiable in principle, that is, refuted in the process of comparison with empirical data, have the status of scientificity. In this case, the emphasis is on a critical approach to the results of theoretical research.

The principle of rationalism. This is the ideal of philosophical classical ideas about true science. According to these ideas, reliable knowledge (it is associated with universality, simplicity, predictability, etc.) can be obtained only on the basis of logical constructions. Critically approaching the classical ideas about the scientific nature of knowledge, modern postpositivists reject unified theory rationality based on "historical relativism". Within its framework, the idea of ​​rational knowledge changes historically, including characteristics (for example, intuition) that are not accepted by classical rationalism.

Differentiating true knowledge from untrue knowledge is not so easy. It is not always possible to set up an experiment, to conduct an experimental verification of the relevant theoretical propositions, especially in the social sciences and the humanities.

M. Polanyi (1891-1976) formulated a theory according to which there are two types of knowledge. Namely: explicit knowledge, expressed in categories, concepts, laws, theoretical constructions, etc.; implicit knowledge that does not have a clear theoretical apparatus, fixed mainly in practical actions (skills, mastery, etc.).

Scientific truth is a balance between explicit and implicit knowledge And if in natural science (and technical science) there is a large degree of explicit knowledge, then, on the contrary, in human knowledge there is a large degree of implicit knowledge. Approaching scientific truth involves the "translation" of an increasingly significant part of knowledge from its implicit to its explicit form. This is a dynamic process determined by the historical and socio-cultural conditions of the development of science.

4. Universal principles and general scientific methods of cognition

Universal principles are mental techniques used in all areas of cognitive activity, in the system of natural, technical and human sciences. Let's point out just a few of them.

The principle of objectivity. The desire to consider an object (phenomenon, thing or process), based on internal (immanent) representations.

development principle. Representation, according to which a change in both quantitative and qualitative terms of a thing, phenomenon or process is their internal property.

Development is inherent in both organic and inorganic objects, as well as socio-cultural systems. stand out different kinds development. Namely: ascending and descending, progressive and regressive, from higher to lower, from simple to complex, from necessary to accidental, etc.

The principle of system. It is supposed to analyze a thing, phenomenon or process in the unity, interaction and interconnection of all their elements; consideration of the elements of the system as a whole.

Consistency- striving for the inclusiveness of the cognitive process, which is interpreted as an epistemological ideal. One of the system features is the interconnection of the formalized and non-formalized means and methods used in it to study objects of various levels studied by the natural technical and human sciences.

The universal principles of scientific knowledge (some of them discussed above) are concretized within the framework of general scientific methods. Let's single out a number of them.

Induction and deduction. They are based on the ratio of discreteness (separation) and integrity (commonness) of reality.

Induction (from Latin inductio - guidance) is a method of cognition based on inferences from the particular to the general, when consciousness moves from particular knowledge to the general, to the knowledge of laws. Scientific induction establishes causal relationships based on the repetition and interconnection of the essential properties of a part of things and phenomena of a certain group, and from them to the identification of universal causal relationships. Inductive reasoning does not give reliable knowledge, but only "suggests" the thought to reveal such knowledge.

Deduction (from Latin deductio - inference) is a method of cognition, opposite to induction, based on inferences from the general to the particular. Deductive reasoning provides reliable knowledge, provided that it is contained in the relevant premises. In real cognition, deduction and induction are interrelated. The constructiveness of the deductive method is associated with the subject-practical and socio-cultural activities of a person. In other words, its effectiveness is due to the accumulation and theoretical interpretation of the relevant empirical material.

Analysis and synthesis. The mental and real process of dividing the whole into its constituent parts, followed by the acquisition of the lost integrity.

Analysis (from the Greek. analysis - decomposition) - the method cognizes associated with the mental dismemberment of a thing, phenomenon or process into constituent elements for the purpose of cognition. The analytical method makes it possible to cognize a part as an element of the whole.

Synthesis (from Greek synthesis - connection) - opposite mental operation, associated with the union of the selection of the elements of the object into a whole. Analysis and synthesis are interrelated.

Essentially, synthesis is a cognitive process enriched by the results analytical method. Moreover, from a general method of cognition, analysis and synthesis are transformed into special research methods corresponding to specific sciences (mathematical analysis, synthetic chemistry, etc.).

Classification and generalization. Logical ordering of scientific objects and processes of reality.

Classification (from Latin classis - category and facere - to do) - a method of dividing the studied things, phenomena or processes into separate groups in accordance with certain features. There are: natural classification, within which significant similarities and differences of objects are revealed (for example, in biology); and artificial classification (say, a library alphabetical catalog). Classification according to essential features is characterized as a typology. Any classification is rather conditional and relative, being improved in the process of cognition of real objects. Classification is a form of generalization.

Generalization is a method of thinking, within the framework of which general properties, signs and qualities of things, phenomena and processes of reality are revealed. The obtained generalized knowledge means an in-depth reflection of reality, indicates further penetration into the essence of the object under study. So, if within the framework of the classification, specific features of an object are distinguished (for example, the concepts of “birch”, “poplar”, “maple”, etc.), then the generalization goes to the level of generic features (in this case, the concept of “tree”) , discarding signs of a specific nature.

Analogy and likeness. Identification of similar elements in heterogeneous objects and systems.

Analogy (Greek analogia - correspondence) is a method based on identifying similarities in some respects, aspects and qualities of non-identical objects. It relies on the logical method of reasoning by analogy. In the early stages of the development of science, analogy replaced experiment and observation. Thus, ancient pre-science (natural philosophy) proceeded from the identity of the microcosm (man) and the macrocosm (nature). Later, on the basis of analogy, the similarity was substantiated. human body and the state, an organism with a human mechanism.

Similarity is a variant of analogy; used, however, to compare similar objects but of different scales. For example, “similar triangles” are distinguished, i.e. geometric figures, characterized by multidimensional scale.

abstraction and idealization. Theoretical selection and consideration of an object or process that does not actually exist.

Abstraction (from Latin abstractio - distraction) is the process of mentally highlighting individual aspects, properties, qualities or relations of a thing, phenomenon or process while simultaneously abstracting from their other characteristics, which in this research context are not considered as defining. The abstraction method allows you to better understand what is being studied phenomenon.

Idealization (from the Greek idea - image, representation) is a mental process that involves the selection of some abstract object that does not fundamentally exist in objective reality. These objects act as a means of scientific analysis, the basis of the theory. "Idealized" objects are characteristic of the entire system of scientific knowledge, namely: in mathematics - "absolutely black body"; in physics - "point"; in chemistry - "ideal solution"; in sociology - "a type of rationality"; in cultural studies - "cultural-historical type", etc.

Idealization is a form of abstraction expression. It is in the process of idealization that the ultimate abstraction from the real properties and qualities of a thing or phenomenon takes place with the simultaneous introduction of features that do not exist in reality into the content of the formed concepts. For example, the concept of "material point" is an ideal object, but its use is not only theoretical (in the process of creating a scientific theory), but also has a practical application (for example, for calculating the movement of specific material objects). The concept of "Western type of rationality" (M. Weber) allows, for example, to give a theoretical analysis of the foundations of Western civilization ("Protestant ethics").

Modeling and thought experiment. Revealing the relationship between a real object (process) and its analogue.

Modeling (from French modell - sample) is a method in which the object under study (original) is replaced by another (model) specially created for its study. Modeling is used when the study of a thing, phenomenon or process is impossible or difficult for one reason or another.

There are several types of modeling, namely: physical, mathematical, logical, computer. Simulation capabilities are increasing in the process of improving computerization - from local to global modeling, i.e., to building models on a planetary scale.

One of the types of modeling is thought experiment. This is a way of scientific thinking, similar to the structure of a material experiment, with the help of which, relying on theoretical knowledge and empirical data, constructing ideal models of the object under study and the conditions interacting with it, the essence of the theoretical problem is revealed. In a mental experiment, one operates with ideal objects and ideal conditions acting on them. Mental conditions are constructed on the basis of both experimental and theoretical methods of cognition.

Mathematization. One of the fundamental methods of a general scientific nature, giving empirical knowledge a theoretical status.

Mathematization (from the Greek mathema - knowledge) - the penetration of mathematical methods into all areas of scientific knowledge, the established system of sciences.

Mathematization manifests itself in various ways in the sciences. A special relationship develops between physics and mathematics. If in classical physics a theory of the corresponding processes was originally created, for which a suitable mathematical apparatus was later constructed, then modern physics creates a mathematical apparatus corresponding to the new theory. In other words, modern theory reveals the physical meaning in abstract mathematical constructions. The use of mathematical methods made it possible to create theoretical biology; the mathematization of chemistry has significantly increased the possibilities of organic synthesis; the application of mathematics in geography put it in the group of leading natural sciences. Mathematization is actively used in the sciences of the socio-economic and humanitarian profile (economic mathematics, mathematical sociology, etc.).

Both universal principles and general scientific methods of cognition are "additional" in relation to each other. It is in the process of their interaction that an adequate idea of ​​objective reality in its entirety is formed.

5. Dynamics of scientism and anti-scientism

Science is an integral part of culture. In various historical periods of the development of civilization, the dominant of culture was determined by different forms of social consciousness, namely: in the ancient period, the civilizational process was based on myth, in the medieval period - religion, in the Renaissance and Enlightenment - philosophy.

In the era of the New Age, science gradually becomes the determining factor in the development of the socio-cultural processes of civilization. It is science, and in particular the forms of its implementation, that increasingly determine the specifics of the relationship between man, society and the natural environment.

In European culture, since the ancient period, an idea has been formed in accordance with which knowledge is regarded as a blessing, that is, science is interpreted as a phenomenon that has intrinsic value. In the dynamics of historical development, this led to scientism - worldview that absolutizes the role of science and scientific knowledge in the sociocultural process. Moreover, science was presented as a model for the development of culture.

Modern forms of scientism are characteristic of the 20th century, when the achievements of the scientific and technological revolution era were considered predominantly as positive phenomena that ensure the dynamism of scientific and technological (and socio-economic) progress. Within the framework of scientism, the idea dominates, according to which most of the problems that arise in the system of human relations with the outside world can be solved using scientific and technical methods and technologies. Scientism merges with technocracy in its desire to resolve the socio-economic contradictions of society on the basis of scientific methods of management.

Scientism and technocracy developed in the second half of the 20th century. in the form of theories of post-industrialism, according to which a traditional industrial society must (and can) overcome internal conflicts in the process of correcting the established directions and guidelines for development (“environmental revolution”, “information revolution, etc.). The dynamism of the modern “post-industrial society” confirms, according to many scientists, the effectiveness of the ideology of scientism.

The alternative scientism is "anti-scientism" - a worldview that focuses on the negative aspects and consequences of the development of science. If at the initial stages of its active dynamics scientism prevailed (anti-scientism was not clearly manifested), then gradually anti-scientism takes an increasingly important place in the analysis of the status of science in society.

And if initially antiscientism was based on the negative consequences of the development of physics, then later the experience of biology and genetic engineering was used in this context; chemistry with the negative impact of its derivatives on the biosphere. Psychology can be used to manipulate human personality, and sociology - to influence public consciousness and behavior individual groups society, etc.

At the turn of the XX and XXI centuries. The question is formulated as follows: is science good or evil? Is its development a blessing or a threat to the existence of man, society and the biosphere?

In the history of science, it is figuratively customary to single out two types of scientific knowledge. Namely: the science of the "Apollo" and "Faustian" type. In the first case, we mean the science of the ancient period with its contemplation, passivity, locality, irrationality; secondly, modern science with its activity, dynamism, globality, rationality. It is with these characteristics that ideas about the "crisis" of scientific knowledge are associated with the "dead end" direction of its development.

Indeed, science of the Western (Faustian) type has determined high level development of modern civilization. And yet, its historically established characteristics are subject to significant criticism. Let's say a point of view is substantiated. according to which, for example, rationalism, as one of the defining characteristics of Western-type science, is by no means a sufficient principle for the formation of an adequate scientific picture of the world - a true idea of ​​active reality. It is necessary, within the framework of this point of view, to “complement” rationalism with views of an irrationalist nature.

At the end of the XX century. there is not a "crisis" of natural science knowledge, but a paradigm shift (Greek paradeigma - sample), i.e. traditional theoretical, philosophical, socio-cultural prerequisites that determine the development of science.

At the end of the XX century. there is a tendency to overcome the "gap" between the natural sciences (technical) and the humanities, the sciences of nature, technology and man. The degree of "humanization" of science is increasing, i.e. its relationship with the socio-cultural processes of reality is enhanced. At the same time, the process of “scientification” of culture is intensifying, due to the penetration of scientific ideas, concepts and ideas into the totality of knowledge about man and society.

Conclusion

The modern scientific picture of the world is becoming increasingly systemic and integrative. Within its framework, prerequisites are created for the "transfer" of basic concepts and ideas from the sphere of natural sciences to the field of humanitarian knowledge. Natural science and socio-cultural processes are considered in the dynamics of their changes. We are talking about the prerequisites and conditions for the formation of a holistic picture of the world, to which modern scientific knowledge strives.

Bibliography

1. History and philosophy of science. Ursul A.D., Publishing house RAGS, Moscow, 2006

Similar Documents

test, added 12/30/2010


Methods of cognition as a complex system, their classification. The role of the dialectical method of cognition for modern science. Implementation and application of the principles of dialectics. General scientific methods of empirical knowledge. Need in unified system units of measure.

abstract, added 12/12/2016


The problem of knowledge in philosophy. The concept and essence of everyday knowledge. Rationality of everyday knowledge: common sense and reason. Scientific knowledge its structure and features. Methods and forms of scientific knowledge. Basic criteria of scientific knowledge.

abstract, added 06/15/2017


Sides of really existing knowledge. Problems of the nature and possibilities of cognition, the relation of knowledge to reality. Philosophical positions on the problem of knowledge. Principles of skepticism and agnosticism. Basic forms of knowledge. The nature of the cognitive relationship.

presentation, added 09/26/2013


Origin in philosophy of the term "theory of knowledge". The process of comprehension by a person of the surrounding world, interaction with material systems. Property and concepts of intuition, the role of thinking. Absolute and relative truth. Principles of scientific knowledge.

presentation, added 04/27/2015


The essence of scientific knowledge and its methods. Scientific picture of the world as a special form of theoretical knowledge. Stages of the evolution of science: classical, non-classical and post-non-classical science. The norms of scientific ethics and the aspects of the activities of scientists that they cover.

test, added 05/19/2014


Science: concept and social institution. Structure and specifics of scientific knowledge. The concept of method and methodology. Empirical and theoretical research methods. Forms of scientific knowledge. The phenomenon of scientific revolution. Social responsibility of a scientist.

lecture, added 05/25/2014


The concept and main components of science, features of scientific knowledge. Essence and "Matthew's effect" in science. Differentiation of sciences by branches of knowledge. Philosophy as a science. The specificity of the knowledge of social phenomena. Methodological aspects of the existence of science.

term paper, added 10/18/2012


Knowledge as a subject philosophical analysis. Structure of knowledge, key theories of truth. Scientific knowledge, its levels and forms. Practice as a criterion of truth. The concept of method and methodology of scientific knowledge. The main problems of modern philosophy of science.

presentation, added 05/20/2015


The theory of knowledge (epistemology) is a branch of philosophy that studies such problems as the nature of knowledge, its possibilities and limits, attitude to reality, the subject and object of knowledge. Characteristics of reflexive and non-reflexive forms of cognition.

Science is a historically established and institutionally formed sphere of human activity, aimed at objective knowledge of the surrounding reality, the development of theoretical ideas about phenomena, properties, patterns. Science is looking for answers to questions - “How does this world work?”, “Why and because of what does something happen this way and not otherwise?”, “What will happen if ...?” etc. The collection, systematization, description and explanation of empirical facts is the basis of scientific knowledge of the surrounding world. Scientific knowledge is also built through the analysis and synthesis of existing and new knowledge. Science not only describes observable natural, social and psychological phenomena, but also tries to build causal relationships. The main criterion for testing the objectivity of scientific knowledge is its predictiveness.

Science differs from other forms of knowledge of the surrounding world - myth, faith, contemplation, artistic knowledge, everyday knowledge.

Myth gives a person the possibility of a holistic experience of the world, explaining and justifying the observed phenomena and events according to the associative principle, according to the laws of participation (causality according to the principle of participation), animism (animation), anthropomorphism (similarity to a person), totemism (totem cult). Myth is a stable form of worldview based on collective ideas (according to L. Levy-Brul). In mythological thinking, everything has a reason, will, soul, and the task of a person is to build a dialogue or some kind of interaction with the outside world. An important function of the myth is to give certainty of ideas about the world and suggest how to behave in this world (ritualization of life).

In traditional cultures, the image of the world has a symbolic nature and is embodied in mythological ideas about the world. In its most general form, the mythological picture of the world (model of the world) is defined as an abbreviated and simplified representation of the entire sum of ideas about the world within a particular tradition. The bearers of this tradition may not be aware of the picture of the world in its entirety and consistency. The “world” is understood as a person and the environment in their interaction, i.e. the world is the result of processing information about the environment and the person himself with the help of sign systems. The picture of the world is realized in various semiotic incarnations, coordinated among themselves and forming a single universal system, to which they are subordinate 1 .

Science, of course, is also subject to the creation of myths - scientific myths. But, as A. F. Losev notes, science is opposite in nature to myth. “The mythical consciousness is completely direct and naive, generally understandable; scientific consciousness necessarily has an inferential, logical character; it is not immediate, difficult to assimilate, requires long learning and abstract skills. Myth is always synthetically vital and consists of living personalities, whose fate is illuminated emotionally and intimately perceptually; science always turns life into a formula, giving instead of living personalities their abstract schemes and formulas; and realism, the objectivism of science, does not consist in a colorful depiction of life, but in the correct correspondence of an abstract law and formula with the empirical fluidity of phenomena, beyond any picturesqueness, picturesqueness or emotionality.

Of course, in such a contrast, myth appears to be something vital, while science is lifeless. But it is not so. This different ways knowledge and description of the world. The myth is really closer to ordinary knowledge, accessible to every person. In certain life situations it is easier for us to justify events, phenomena, facts according to the mythological principle, and not to resort to complex scientific constructions and methods of cognition. And one should not think that mythological consciousness is a property of only primitive peoples or traditional culture. In fact, we see how in modern everyday life the myth continues to occupy a significant niche in the knowledge of the surrounding world. Let's take an example. This situation is quite typical even among professional psychologists: at the beginning of communication with a new person for them, they are immediately interested in what sign of the zodiac he was born under. Having received an answer, they pronounce, literally, the following phrase: “Ah, All It's clear...". And here we observe the classical scheme of the action of cognition according to the mythological principle, when a feeling of completeness of knowledge is created on the basis of one sign. And this is while completely ignoring the fact that psychology in its scientific basis provides an understanding of the systemic complexity and heterogeneity of the influence of various factors (external and internal) on certain manifestations, actions, actions of a person. It is this complexity for understanding that is removed according to the mythological principle, making “everything understandable”. In everyday life, this way of understanding the surrounding reality is perhaps the dominant one. And in many cases, there is nothing wrong with that. But for a professional, this is a false and disastrous path. After all, such a primitivization of the vision of the situation does not allow us to notice and take into account significant factors, does not allow us to see a picture adequate to reality, which has a significant potential for predictability.

Religious faith - recognition of something as true by virtue of an inner conviction based on religious dogmas, without prior

actual or logical verification, i.e. without evidence. Every religion has a system of basic texts and dogmas that require them to be accepted on faith. A believer in a religious interpretation is a person who sees the world based on the religious teachings of a given denomination and builds a model of his behavior in accordance with this teaching. Faith does not imply doubt, but implies adherence to dogma. But the original text can be interpreted in different ways. And the interpretation of the basic text becomes a way of understanding the facts of the present and experiencing the future. Science, on the other hand, is in a constant internal struggle with dogma, and doubt is one of the main psychological mechanisms movement of scientific knowledge.

Religion gives a lot for a person - it sets the semantic coordinates of life and forms an idea of ​​the infinity of human existence even after death. It orients a person in the system of values, determines moral norms, and regulates life priorities. It is no accident, as V. Frankl noted, that with the decline in the importance of religion in the life of society, most of the semantic tasks that were carried out by religious institutions passed to psychologists. A person needs to understand the meaning of his life. Religion sets such meanings in the system of dogmas and texts. Outside of religion, a person has to be in an independent search for these meanings. And this is very difficult without external supports, especially when the internal ones have not yet been built.

Contemplation- a way of direct sensory knowledge of the surrounding world through its non-critical perception. Contemplation gives us the experience of a direct holistic representation of the visible or otherwise sensually perceived. Contemplation is interpreted differently in various philosophical and scientific schools. In some teachings, it is opposed to arbitrary observation, and somewhere it is identified with it. In any case, contemplation as a way of cognition is associated with a developed sensitivity of perception and is determined by it. And it is no coincidence that the concepts of “see and see”, “listen and hear” are divorced. In the context of the teachings of Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), contemplation is opposed to knowledge through thinking. But contemplation is extremely important for adequate orientation in the world with the help of the sense organs and sensory perception.

Science has discovered beyond the visible limit whole worlds of invisible details.

A. I. Herzengy. And since the Renaissance, when the value of authorship, artistic interpretation and expressiveness appears, the artistic path of cognition becomes relatively independent. At present, for art, the identity of the creator, his authorial, subjective vision of the world is a priority. Whereas for science, objective, impersonal knowledge is paramount (this does not mean that authorship is leveled in science; it is important that the personal attitude of the author should not affect the objectivity of knowledge). Artistic knowledge is largely based on the creative transformation of the figurative-sensory perception of the world, on imagination, while science is based on a rational, logical way of knowing.

At the same time, it should be noted that art and science are closely connected within the sphere of culture. And not only biographically or according to the principle of the significance of inspiration. Science draws much from art, and art from science. In the applied aspect, they have many planes of direct intersection (for example, in architecture). This is especially pronounced in psychology. Many works of art subtly and accurately reflect psychological phenomena, deeply reveal psychological phenomena. It is no coincidence that poets and writers (A. S. Pushkin, F. M. Dostoevsky, N. V. Gogol, L. N. Tolstoy, A. P. Chekhov and others) are considered the most profound connoisseurs of human souls in our country. Some writers even went out of the space of art into the space of science, preserving the subtlety of the artistic reflection of reality. Such examples include the completely scientific book of the writer and poet K. I. Chukovsky “From Two to Five”, in which the author presented an excellent analysis of the speech (and not only) development of the child. It is also worth noting that in the works of many authors (artists, directors, writers) there is a trace of the influence of psychological theories (for example, S. Dali, F. Fellini, A. Bergson created many of their works under the influence of psychoanalysis and analytical psychology, and works of art by Zh .-G1 Sartre and A. Camus are inextricably linked with existential psychology).

In the form of works of art, they tried to express their pedagogical concepts of J.-J. Rousseau, J. Korchak, A. S. Makarenko. Other educators used art as pedagogical tool(K. D. Ushinsky, L. N. Tolstoy, V. A. Sukhomlinsky and others).

Life sets goals for science; science illuminates the path of life.

N. K. Mikhailovsky of special methods, while everyday knowledge is based on direct experience and subjective perception.

All science is nothing more than a refinement of everyday thinking.

A. Einstein

However, life experience and scientific knowledge are not in such an antagonistic relationship. It is because of the noticed problematic issues in everyday life that many scientific discoveries. And many scientific discoveries change everyday life, affect everyday life. In addition, many scientific hypotheses, assumptions, theories must be tested by everyday, common sense, life practice. Otherwise, they will remain only abstract theories.

What criteria of knowledge should science itself satisfy? Question about scientific criteria- one of the key in the methodology of science. Among the many criteria of scientificity, the following can be singled out as the most important:

• - truth (with the understanding that science is an attempt to solve problem situations and it is impossible to achieve absolute truth. "All science begins with the consciousness of ignorance");
• - validity (justification can be different - empirical, mathematical, logical, theoretical);
• - testability (scientific knowledge is considered justified if there is a fundamental possibility of its verification by another researcher, or by another method, or in a different situation, or on other material);
• - consistency (scientific knowledge must be logically organized);
• - incompleteness (scientific knowledge cannot be finite, you need to understand where the boundaries of the known are, and see the prospects for further development).

(See task 1 to chapter 1.)

Vladimir Ivanovich Vernadsky (1863-1945)

The philosopher of science E. A. Pozdnyakov writes that “all science is a pure fruit creative activity human being (... which) is primarily and predominantly intellectually rational, abstract, subject to certain logical, schematic rules” 1 .

Scientific thinking differs from the ordinary way of organizing its work, its orderliness and purposefulness. Speaking about scientific knowledge, academician V. A. Engelgardt wrote: “Scientific creativity is the result of an instinct acting in us, the result of the desire to satisfy the inner need inherent in us by nature, the need to expand the field of human knowledge, to clarify what was previously vague, bring elements of order into the chaos of the unknown that surrounds us.

The main way to satisfy the need for knowledge is research. Historically, research has become a cultural mechanism for the development of science, but at the same time it remains a way of activity independent of science, i.e. available for use by other cultural institutions, including schools, and especially universities. Actually in European history the development of science and the formation of universities are in fact interrelated and in many respects identical processes.

A developing person is initially in a contradictory state of choice - to explore or take on faith. We make this choice constantly and in most cases unconsciously. The position of conformism, passive acceptance, adherence to external requirements, the need for a stable position and certainty in a number of cases turn out to be necessary, advantageous for a successful social adaptation. This is especially true for the model of a stable society. But they turn out to be losing in a situation of instability, uncertainty, which requires independence from a person in finding an effective solution, an optimal way out of a problem situation. The situation of uncertainty actualizes an active, research position in relation to problems. However, if sociocultural norms constantly suppressed research activity in a person, he would rather start looking for support from outside than try to cope on his own.

Vernadsky V.I. Proceedings on the history of science in Russia. M.: Nauka, 1988. S. 75.

There. S. 64.

Pozdnyakov E. A. Philosophy of Culture. M.: Iiturreklama, 1999. S. 485.

Engelgardt V. A. Cognition of the phenomena of life. M.: Nauka, 1984. S. 297.

Leontovich A. V. On the problem of development of research in science and education // Development of research activities of students: methodical. collection / ed.-comp. A. S. Obukhov. M.: Public education, 2001. S. 33-37.